About your Search

20130107
20130115
SHOW
( more )
STATION
MSNBCW 29
CSPAN 26
CNNW 23
KQED (PBS) 16
CSPAN2 11
FBC 11
LINKTV 11
KRCB (PBS) 9
KTVU (FOX) 8
KNTV (NBC) 7
CNN 5
KGO (ABC) 5
MSNBC 5
KCSM (PBS) 4
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 242
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 244 (some duplicates have been removed)
unfortunately is not here to the -- today but is a:editor about the taliban and its environment southern afghanistan, and western pakistan. to get at them itself when the united states was puzzling over its resurgence in afghanistan as a military challenge that had been neglected in the years after the 2001 arab emirates that it presented itself as a grave dilemma to the obamacare administration so we try to provide the regularity about this phenomenon recognizing the cliche image of the of one i aid malaya and his band of fanatics was inaccurate and falsified the problem. said not to prosecute a particular view of the taliban but look at its diversity and aspects of the character fetter not part of american debate to. i am really proud of this book and peter whose leadership from new america has been a joy in my office to support him and watch him. the last thing i want to talk -- that i want to say is with the research is part of a much broader body of work that we engaged in it and hope your subscribers and readers as you are with foreign policy with conferences and publications, anyw
turkey and pakistan. so that constitutes the click of the taliban leadership in formally. second is the military side. people who may not be on the ground in afghanistan leading fighters but directing the insurgency on the day-to-day level. they either distressed u.s. intentions lower point* through the 2002 through 2004 period and many are people that did try to cut the deals and were rebuffed so know are on the military side. said talking to them as well there is a sense that they can reconstitute the '90s taliban. so if they hold on a little bit longer they can do that. but it is to understand the different position those with ordinary afghans with a focus on the troop number and talking whether there is 6,000 or 3,000 troops in afghanistan. that is important in the village where it is thought they would say they don't want any troops but in my discussion they don't think about it which is what we face today is a question of state formation. and in 2004. what i mean by that is and attempting to build the afghan state what happened was on the one hand they put money into kabul
we are transitioning, too. taliban? where do we compromise? we have to reach these agreements as a nation, and with our allies. it goes to the other side of the table, to talk to the paula bond. that is the key for reconciliation. another issue impacting the ability of the afghan security forces is the insider attack. sometimes, people are disappointed, and say, how could this happen? how could they turn the guns against us, when we trained them? this is an important issue. as the taliban have indicated, that is their most successful tactic to undermine trust between the afghan security forces and international security forces. it is really the most effective way of destabilizing afghan security forces. it is key to know why it is happening. the first reason is infiltration. of course, they purposefully infiltrates. we have low recruitment criteria. we do not have a strong national data system to look at who is coming in. the second part is intimidation. when people are enlisting in the force, the taliban are contacting their parents and family and threatening them. when there
, the taliban. major garrett is covering at the white house for us tonight. major? >> reporter: scott, the president has long encouraged the afghan government to seek peace with taliban fighters who infiltrate from neighboring pakistan. today for the first time mr. obama said those talks are specific enough that they deserve a formal home. >> president karzai updated me on the afghan government's road map to peace and today we agreed that this process should be advanced by the opening of a taliban office to facilitate talks. >> reporter: prospects for peace remain dim and taliban aggression when fighting resumes this spring is not expected to let up. but the u.s. combat role will never be the same. >> our troops will continue to fight alongside afghans when needed, but let me say it as plainly as i can: starting this spring our troops will have a different mission. training, advising, assisting afghan forces. it will be an historic moment and another step toward full afghan sovereignty, something i know president karzai cares deeply about, as do the afghan people. >> reporter: mr. oba
be seeking to go to afghanistan or who would be considering the taliban as an asset for the future. i am not going to go into details of these as far as the taliban as concerned. there is no question of popular returning to get in why i did enter the mid 1990's. there are reasons for this. there are to be details. i was the before the moment. there is one thing it. pakistan cannot treat them. this is a point which i think was the demographics and the history and a culture. we will appreciate as much as any pakistan would -- it will remain part of the afghan landscape. here there was a disconnect between the of kasten a position right after 9/11. i think he has made a remark that it their position is not -- it was not helpful. even at that time, pakistan has argued that reconcilable pakistan should be brought into the floor of the process. that is passed. and this brown there has been a misunderstanding of but say even unfair accusations pakistan has been double dealing etcetera, pakistan could not treat al qaeda -- after two of the night but the american afghanistan where the situation m
of the taliban. i think that was a major mistake. the second was to allow the coalition we successfully built for the war and the peace conference disintegrate. iran had been helpful, rebuffed offers of further help. pakistan had at least been not actively and helpful but we failed to keep them up to that standard in the succeeding years. the third error which i failed to perceive was a failure to pursue reconciliation much earlier than we finally did. there were certain proportion of the taliban leadership that were prepared to be coopted and that would have collaborated new arrangements and instead we send them to guantanamo and send very negative signals to those who might consider coopting and being coopted into the new system and it took us almost a decade to reverse that policy. nevertheless, despite these problems and despite the fact that now more than ten years on, we are still engaged in a counterinsurgency campaign. we have come a long way than many of us realize and i think some of this is reflected in a recent poll the asia society put out a couple weeks ago which showed in disti
responsibility in the aftermath of the fall of the taliban. i think that was a major mistake. the second was to allow the coalition we had successfully built for the war and for the peace conference to disintegrate. iran had been very helpful. week rebuffed offers of further help. pakistan had at least then not actively and helpful. but we failed to keep them up to that standard in the succeeding years. the third error which i failed to perceive was a failure to pursue reconciliation much earlier than we finally did. there were a certain proportion of the taliban leadership that were prepared to be cooperative, that would have collaborated. instead, we sent them to guantanamo, and sent a negative signal to those who might consider who being coopted into the new system. it took us almost a decade to reverse that policy. nevertheless, despite these problems, and despite the fact that now, more than 10 years on, we are still engaged in a counterinsurgency campaign in afghanistan, i think we have come a longer way than many of us realize. some of this is reflected in a recent poll the asia s
in 2009. taliban will be given a seat at table and allowed to open an office in qatar. the taliban must first renounce terrorism. >> bret: we talked about what the troop number will be at the end of 2014. what is the going thinking on that. what about the concern about protecting those troops if the number is very low? >> well, absolutely. what we have confirmed is general john allen, the top commanderrer in afghanistan given the national security team around the president three options. 9,000 option, 6,000 option. and 3,000 option. the president will likely decide on 3,000 to 6,000 troops and that will not give you much option in terms of the training and assisting the afghanistan security forces. they will set up bases to deal with al-qaeda if fringe area along the border. >> bret: we'll follow it. jennifer griffin at the pentagon. thank you. do you think the president should speed up the process of having afghan take control of the security? let me know on twitter. to me at bret baier. the politics, west virginia senator rockefeller will not seek a sixth term. the leader of the congr
to shape where the taliban goes because, of course, its internal issue is that the afghan taliban began to actually seed and grow in insurgency inside pakistan that they had to deal with, and i think that's fundamental. the troops on the ground don't necessarily help us solve that problem. other issues, money and other elements of state, will help us influence pakistan. >> what do we know about conversations between the karzai regime and the taliban, the negotiations in france? >> well, president karzai during our interview said that they are currently still in negotiations and talking to the taliban, but there hasn't been any proof that they actually have been because the taliban themselves they send emails and talk to us on the phone as journalists and they tell us that in no way will they talk to what they call the puppet regime of america, referring to president karzai in his government, but the afghan officials that we speak to, they say that they are currently talking to the taliban, but they may be. we just don't know what level of the taliban that they're talking to. >> i know t
army. despite the billions spent and the thousands of lives lost, the taliban has not been defeated. some say at the america pulls out too quickly, it will be trade promises made and leave afghanistan vulnerable. >> it will be difficult to engage down the road if there is a large al qaeda return or the taliban takes over the country, to get the afghanistan's to trust us when we say we will be there to help you. >> america described it as the final chapter in afghanistan. president obama downsized out of the ambitions, winding down the war that is increasingly unpopular at home. this is not the final chapter. that is just that americans have grown wary about spending the money and spilling the blood. >>> for more on the future of the u.s. mission, i spoke a short time ago with the former u.s. ambassador to afghanistan. ambassador, thank you very much for coming in. president obama says that things are going so well he can actually speed up the transition. are the afghan security forces really ready to take over in the spring or is this more a matter of expediency for both countries?
seeing it as a counterproductive tool in the long run. >> sometimes there referred to as good taliban and bad taliban. it is okay for the americans to be targeting some and not others. >> they have called in the ambassador. what you might be calling quiet is quiet diplomacy happening in the background. today, the relations are at a much better spot. there is absolutely no question of pakistan finding these to be -- you ask about good taliban and bad taliban. any insurgent group which uses violence as a means to prove its power is harmful to the national interest of pakistan. any group that uses violence is counter to our interest. >> you are watching "bbc world news america." as the south china sea heats up with territorial disputes, we report from the hobbit contested region. it is the due date that has been a waiting around the world. we now know that the duke and duchess of cambridge will be having a baby this summer. in july to be exact. the child is set to be third in line for the eighth round. is said tos' health have improved. there will only be one baby on the way. our corresp
peace but peace with the taliban will not drive us away from the gains that we have made. rather those gains will definitely be consolidated and those gains will remain with the afghan people. you,m talking to afghanistan has a standing police of 350,000. afghanistan has a banking sector, afghanistan has a strong culture. you've all heard of pomegranates they come from afghanistan. you have heard of grapes. they come from afghanistan. the ones that come from afghanistan, i know you have them in california as well. [laughter] so, ladies and gentlemen, there is a country in afghanistan just like here in america just like the rest of the world. there is wedding and wedding halls, there is music, there is cars honking, there are donkey driven carts. there is society, there is life. this society is out loudly and moving forward as any other society. it is this that i would like you to remember when you think of afghanistan. a country of 5000 years of history, at least. a country that has produced thinkers, philosophers. a country like other countries, and i can tell you that the most recent
their camps. taliban infiltration is often to blame. the tactic is to undermine the relationship between afghan forces and the coalition partners, making it more difficult for the afghan military to take over security here. president karzai arrived in washington today. mapping out afghanistan's future after foreign combat troops have left. their meeting will determine the primary mission, to fight the taliban or to get rid of al qaeda. president karzai wants soldiers. his forces lead emissions across the country. they are still not ready. for many years to come, these soldiers in afghanistan generally will rely on america's support. >> for more on those meetings taking place, i spoke with peter bergen. what is the main sticking point in these meetings between what the white house wants and what president karzai wants? >> it is the question of immunity for american forces. the u.s. does not want its soldiers being prosecuted by an afghan accords for obvious reasons. this is a big sticking point. >> karzai would like that? >> yes. that is very much what he would like. and then there is the
as taliban momentum, and to give ourselves a bridge force to give us time to build up afghan security forces did i reluctantly come to the conclusion we're going to need more western forces, probably mostly american. we came up with detailed analysis on what we had to secure to be effective, and the requirement was for 40,000 forces. and so we recommended that which followed not long after our strategic assessment. >> rose: after the number of troops had already come in because of mckernen. >> yes. some of those forces hadn't yet arrived. >> rose: then you went to london. >> yes. >> rose: and you make a speech. the speech is okay. then there's a q&a session. >> yes. >> rose: and you say what. >> rose: i went to london at the request of the british government to engage parts of both their media and their government to explain the strategy. at that time we were executing a strategy that i had derived a mission strategy i derived from president obama's public statements his speeches in the spring when he authorized more forces and my understanding of what it is my mission was which had beg
now but i would say when i arrived in 2002 in afghanistan, pretty early after the fall of the taliban, the country was devastated physically and traumatized sipsychologically. it was literally a basket case. didn't know which way was up. normal was everything before 1978. people couldn't remember normal. they've made a loving progret o. there are girls in school. it's imperfect but now they're scared because there's a lot to lose now. they had this kchaotic 34 year and they don't want to lose it. it isn't numbers of people but it's a relationship that gives them the confidence that we'll are enough of a partner that if they need our help -- not thousands of troops and no billions of dollars -- >> but some sort of relationship. >> some relationship. >> how do you have that when you have afghan forces killing nato forces and personnel? >> there's a lot of mistrust. >> now we stop going on patrols with these guys. >> for a period they did but in reality, again, if you use the anecdote to prove the whole, sometimes it's not true. the wider story is more complex. you've been there. there's
in the world. the taliban controlled the region and this is the environment that the marines came into in 2009 and subsequently it has stabilized significantly since then. so the primary mission of marines in southwest afghanistan is security. but our secondary mission is to assist our interagency partners in kick starting institutions that contribute to a stable nation state. as an educator i joined the team to oversee the portfolio of education and was given the opportunity to implement the country's education strategic plan over the southwest provinces. additionally i was given the national action plan for women and control of two female engagement teams which were marines trained to interact with the population of women because of the pashi culture, the males were not allowed to interact with the women. in order obviously to ensure communities stay strong you have to not only address the men, but you absolutely need to address the women. so we created the female engagement team. with our interagency partners, the u.s. department of state, danish and british governments and of course the
and the taliban with an endgame in sight. >> woodruff: then, margaret warner looks into the faa's decision to review boeing's troubled 787 dreamliner. >> brown: ray suarez talks with "washington post" reporter cecilia kang, who walks us through the high-tech offerings at this year's consumer electronics show. >> samsung came up with a very interesting 5.5 inch flexible screen that kind of makes you imagine all kinds of possibilities >> woodruff: plus mark shields and david brooks analyze the week's news. that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> and by bnsf railway. >> support also comes from carnegie corporation of new york, a foundation created to do what andrew carnegie called "real and permanent good." celebrating 100 years of philanthropy at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and friends of the newshour. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: t
arrived in 2002 in afghanistan, pretty early after the fall of the taliban, the country was devastated physically. and traumatized psychologically, it was literally a basket case, didn't know what was up. and normal was before 1978, that was 24 years at the time. people couldn't remember normal. they made a lot of progress. there are girls in school. there is progress, greater places. there is progress, it is imperfect. now they're scared. they're scared of 2014 because there is a all riglot to lose n they had chaos for 34 years, and the afghan people don't want to lose it. i think what the afghan people want from the u.s. and the west is strategic partnership, not numbers but a relationship that gives them a confidence that we are enough of a partner that if they need our help, not thousands of troops, maybe not even billions of dollars. >> but some sort of presence. >> some sort of presence and some sort of relationship. >> but how do you have that relationship when you have afghan soldiers and police killing u.s. nato forces and utilize personnel, there is a huge amount of distrust,
pursuing peace talks with the taliban. as part of that process, the karzai government has urged pakistan to release more taliban fighters. four were freed last week after more than two dozen were released in the past few months. whatever comes of the peace efforts, president karzai said again today, he plans to step down next year. >> certainly, i will be a retired president and very happily in retirement. >> woodruff: karzai has been dogged by charges of fraud since his re-election, part of larger concerns about corruption in his government. he acknowledged the concerns today, and said he hopes for a proper election to name his successor. >> brown: we pick up on today's meeting with two men with extensive experience in managing u.s.-afghan relations. said jawad was afghanistan's ambassador to washington from 2003 to 2010. before that, he was president karzai's chief of staff. and peter tomsen was a career diplomat who served as special envoy on afghanistan during the george h.w. bush administration. he's the author of "the wars of afghanistan." peter tomsen, let's start with you. what j
the persistent taliban insurgency in afghanistan. friday's meeting between karzai and president obama seems difficult with the competing agendas both leaders have to juggle. we have more. >> reporter: the number of troops in the afghan military is growing, but they are not ready for the mission to control the security of the country after 2014. experts warn that unless international forces say longer, afghanistan risks falling back into a state of civil war with the taliban, but u.s. public opinion is stacked against the long war. americans want their troops to come home as soon as possible. and with increasing attention on the u.s. budget deficit, the campaign is seen as increasingly unaffordable. u.s. media has reported that the white house is considering reducing the number of troops that remain in afghanistan to below 10,000. u.s. deputy national security adviser, ben row said on tuesday that a total withdrawal remains an option. that announcement caused anger among people in afghanistan. >> translator: if all u.s. troops leave afghanistan after 2014, it will be civil war again. we exp
1500 missiles. they continue to identify and target taliban positions more than a decade after the start of the military campaign. the rule of aircraft in the conflict seems to be growing. last year drones fired more than 500 missiles. 200 more than in 2011. commanders are hoping to transfer power to their afghan counter parts. karzai is visiting washington. he plans to ask the obama administration to provide advanced high-tech weapons. >>> the japanese prime minister is moving from meeting to meeting to do what which he for the economy. he's putting pressure on the bank of japan to do more. >> it's clear he wants prices to rise. they will conduct monetary easing to reflect the prime minister request for a 2% inflation target. this comes as prime minister abe called for more cooperation for his administration and the bank of japan. >> translator: during the cent allower house election campaign i call eed for the central banko set a 2% inflation target and take bold, monetary easing steps. i want the bank to take this into consideration when it forms monetary policy. >> translat
name malvi, a taliban commander. as far as i could tell, it was a perfectly legal and good thing to do, but the blowback on the ground is something that -- can be furious and last friday i was at the pentagon talking to the joint chiefs legal advisor who we talked about this at length. one of the things that they try to do as they analyze and propose strike, what's the blowback going to be. >> on the ground. >> on the ground. you can hit a guy in the house, but if all the neighbors -- if that causes them to go join the taliban, you know, you have taken a big step backwards. he was trying to persuade me that they pay attention to that when they're looking at a proposed strike, but the problem is how can do you that from washington? very, very difficult. the evidence so far is in yemen, for example, enormous blowback. you know, the analysis that i've seen is that we've caused more harm than good there. >> ben, i wonder, the other -- there is blowback regionally, but there has been such a lack of discussion here, and i remember the "new york times" kill list story that raised hackles in t
the past four years, we have dealt devastating blows to al qaeda. we pushed the taliban out of their strong holds. the reason they went to war in the first place is now within reach. we want to ensure that al qaeda can never again use afghanistan to launch attacks against america. the 33 thousand additional forces that i ordered served with honor. they completed their mission. they returned last fall. this week we agreed that in spring afghan forces will take the lead across their country and our troops will shift to a supporting role. in the coming months, i will announce the next phase of our drawdown. this progress has been possible because of the heroic sacrifices of our troops and diplomats. alongside forces from many nations. or than half one million americans have served in afghanistan. thousands have been wounded. more than 2000 have given their lives. this remains a very difficult mission. the work ahead will not be easy. our forces are still in harms way. make no mistake. our path is clear. we are moving forward. after more than a decade of war, the nation that we need to rebuild
, you face different levels of [inaudible] the province is quiet. the taliban are not operating. there's less threat against you and your family. therefore despite the inferences being made, we still have challenges to recruit a member -- members of the security forces from those provinces. we purposely go and try to recruit students from the south or places [indiscernible] since the school system was not to this standard, i does not matter. we're not successful to bring them as much as we want. >> do you want to talk about these issues? >> in terms of who revises the afghan national army, in 2001, we had a plethora of offers. the pakistani, the indian, and the iranian fradkin to me and said it wanted to collaborate. i thought that we ought to try to devise some arrangement in which i and some limited aspects, countries could participate. others in the administration were opposed to any iranian role. relations between pakistan and india were at a nadir. coins and with 9/11 and the subsequent bond process, a pakistani base -- terrorist group had conducted a large- scale terrorist attack
said the taliban and al qaeda are two different elements. if we stay after killing bin laden, we have lost our purpose. he said the worst thing we can do is get bogged down without getting out. it wasn't that long ago, but it was interesting to look back a year and eight months ago to when bin laden was killed. i mean, at the time, anybody else think that maybe that would have meant we would come home from afghanistan? it seemed like one of the real possibilities that opened up with that almost unbelievable news on that cold night in may. but we did not leave afghanistan after this happened. this was roughly 600 days ago. we've got another 700 days ahead of us before the white house says this war will officially end, nearly two years from now. but how many american troops are left there between now and then? and what are those troops expected to do? how much fighting are they going to be doing? how much of our 11 and a half yearlong war is going to continue to result in americans getting hurt and killed between now and then? all of that remains to be decided. what is going to happen i
the taliban out of their holds. today, most major cities and most afghans are more secure than insurgents have continued to lose territory. meanwhile, afghan forces continue to grow stronger. as planned, some 352,000 afghan soldiers and police are now in training or on duty. most missions are already being led by afghan forces. and of all the men and women in uniform in afghanistan, the vast majority are afghans who are fighting and dying for their country every day. we still face significant challenges. but because this progress, our transition is on track. at the n.a.t.o. summit last year, we agreed with our coalition partners that after beg afghan forces in 2013. the president has been here and we've consulted with coalition partners and continue to do so. today we agreed that as afghan forces take the lead and as president karzai announces the final phase of the transition, coalitions forces will move to a support role this spring. our troops will continue to fight alongside afghan forces as needed, but starting this spring our troops will have a different mission, training, advising, assi
the fall of the taliban the country was devastated physically and traumatized psychologically. it was a basket case. and normal was everything before 1978. that was 23 years at the time and now it is 34. people couldn't remember normal. they have made a lot of progress. there are girls in school. it is imperfect and now they are scared of 2014 because there is a lot to lose now and they had this chaotic 34 years and the afghan people don't want to lose it. i think instead of just troop numbers what the afghan people want is a partnership which is a relationship that gives them the confidence that we are enough of a partner that if they need our help, not thousands of troops not even billions of dollars but some sort of presence and relationship. >> how do you have that relationship when you have afghan soldiers and police killing nato forces and u.s. personal? i mean there is a huge amount of distress probably more than there has ever been. >> we have to work through that. >> our whole program is building up afghan security forces and yet now we stop going on patrol with these
they will speed up the transition to afghan forces taking the lead in fighting the taliban. that will happened by this spring. abc's muhammad lila joins us with more from a military base in kabul. good morning, muhammad. >> reporter: good morning, ron. this is one of the bases that will be affected. as the u.s. military continues to wind down its presence here in afghanistan. here's what the announcement means. for the most part, american and afghan soldiers have been fighting the taliban, side-by-side, in the mountains, in the valleys, where the taliban are hiding. that is changing. as of this spring, it's afghan soldiers in the lead. they will be the ones initiating the combat with the taliban. the american soldiers will be here to advise and assist when they are requested to. the big test of all of this will be in the spring. if the afghan army can prove they can take on the taliban without american support, it could mean that the 66,000 american troops that are currently stationed here, could be headed home sooner than scheduled. ron? >> thanks, muhammad. muhammad lila reporting from afgha
, it is not possible to reconcile without the taliban renouncing terrorism, without them recognizing the afghan constitution and recognizing that if there are changes that they want to make to how the afghan government operates, then there is an orderly constitutional process to do that and that you can't resort to violence. the afghan constitution protects the rights of afghan women. and the united states strongly believes that afghanistan cannot succeed unless it gives opportunity to its women. we believe that about every country in the world. and so, you know, we will continue to voice very strongly support for the afghan constitution, protection of minorities, its protection of women and we think that a failure to provide that protection, not only will make reconciliation impossible to achieve, but also, would make afghan -- afghanistan's long-term development impossible to achieve. you know? the single best indicator or one of the single best indicators of a country's prosperity around the world is how does it treat its women? does it educate that half of the population? does it give them
-- liberating afghanistan from an invasion and a rule by the taliban. the first one, in reverse order, the first one freeing afghanistan happened within a month and a half to two months. subbing squect of that afghanistan began its journey towards democracy, the rule of law, progress in all aspects of life. it went all right. it went reasonablely good under the circumstances. without a doubt with the help of the united states and our other allies around the world. the second part, freeing us all from terrorism and radicalism, didn't work as swiftly as we expected. there was bumps along the road and setbacks. now, the afghan people regardless where they stand recognize that afghanistan could not have made the progress that we have made in the past 10 years without the help we received from our allies. led by the united states of america. in more cruder terms the u.s. taxpayer's money. it contributed to afghanistan's upliftment. it contributed to the workplace, to society, to policy, the return of young girls to education. the return of universities, roads, communications, mobile phones, computers
about is that from our perspective, it is not possible to reconcile without the taliban renouncing terrorism, without them recognizing the afghan constitution, and recognizing that if there are changes that they want to make to how the afghan government operates, then there is an orderly constitutional process to do that, and you can't resort to violence. the afghan constitution protects the rights of afghan women. and the united states strongly believes that afghanistan cannot succeed unless it gives opportunity to its women. we believe that about every country in the world. and so, you know, we will continue to voice very strongly support for the afghan constitution, its protection of minorities, its protection of women, and we think that a failure to provide that protection, not only will make reconciliation impossible to achieve, but also would make afghan -- afghanistan's long-term development impossible to achieve. the single best indicator or one of the single best indicators of a country's prosperity around the world is how does it treat its women. does it educate that half
thesis is if we have the talent than -- taliban, terrorism has to be fought all over the world. this is the message they are both saying. it is a long drawn out war. it has to end sometime. if we are pulling out a little sooner, there will be critics saying a lot of different things. i really pray and hope this is successful. the education i think is very important. host: jim from tennessee on the line for independents. caller: i watched the press conference between the two presidents. karzai and his government are one of the most corrupt governments ever. we have lost billions of dollars so they could lie in their coffers. they had the taliban sit down at the table. we will be right back over there. to sit down with them, that is where it all created from. that is where the were spawned from. the taliban suppressed women, they do not even want education or music. we are going to be right back over there. this is ridiculous to sit down at the table with the taliban. host: so it is better to leave the troops there for now? caller: it sure would be. i just feel like we will be ri
will the taliban plal in the future of that country. and what role will the united states play after we end our combat mission? how many troops will we keep behind in afghanistan to keep that country secure if we can? jim moran is a democrat congressman from virginia and westmore is a retired army captain and author of "the other wes moore. i guess the question comes down to numbers. 66,000 troops in country right now. what should be it be five years from now. >> i think we're going to initially withdraw to 6,000 troops in 2014. i think a lot of work will be done by contractors, not u.s. troops, but we can't afford to continue spending the kind of money we're spending. you know, we have spent $557 billion up to today, half a trillion dollars, and what have we gotten for it? burma, somalia, and afghanistan are the three most corrupt nations in the world, and now almost 90% of that corruption is coming from american taxpayers' money. you'd be shocked at the amount of american taxpayers' money that's being spent over in dubai because it came in to afghanistan. this is a nation that's -- a governme
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 244 (some duplicates have been removed)